The Govt should find a way to harness talent and expertise from a larger resource pool but with a well thought out strategy for nation building
Since time immemorial, mankind has been facing existential threats and one of the challenges during such times is how to organise manpower to meet the threat. In the modern world, a competent bureaucracy fills the gap but is embroiled in red-tapism, which proves counter-productive. Therefore, it is time for the bureaucracy to embrace innovation to fight any challenges that come its way.
If one actor in the bureaucratic chain slips up, things go haywire quickly. The latest example is the faux pas in Delhi where the impact of the lockdown on daily wagers and the unorganised sector workers was not visualised by the Centre, the Lieutenant-Governor or the Delhi Government. In fact, after the suspension of two IAS officers, it was revealed that the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) buses were ferrying labourers to the Uttar Pradesh border. It should have been planned better. Before/after the announcement of the lockdown by the Prime Minister, officials of different Ministries should have been in touch with State Government officials to handle the migrant workforce and address their needs. The Intelligence Bureau (IB) also appears to have failed in tracking the foreigners who came to India to attend the meet in Nizamuddin. Or its advice was not acted upon by the police and the administration.
This brings us to the need for innovation in the Indian bureaucracy in order to make its functioning quick and effective. There are more than 65 lakh pensioners and 48 lakh regular employees and the question is how to improvise the functional talent of the regular staff and harness the experience of retired officers without committing to any remuneration. Is it possible to have a provision in the rule book to use the experience of retirees in national building without increasing the superannuation age?
The average lifespan is increasing and as per studies a person is at his/her best professional capability in the age group of 60-68 years. Hence, globally almost all governments have increased the retirement age of their staff. The superannuation age of United Nations (UN) employees is 65, in the US it is 66 and will be raised to 67 by 2023. The UK is proposing an increase in the pension age to 66 by 2020 and 67 between 2026-2028. It is the same situation in the most of Europe. But it is still 60 years in India, China, Malaysia, Thailand and other developing countries. However, there is a sound rationale behind this difference. The populations of developed countries have stabilised and due to negative population growth they lack experienced manpower replacement. Therefore, they want to hold on to their experienced workers, particularly when they are at the peak of their capabilities. On the other hand, developing countries like India have burgeoning populations and their educated youth is facing severe unemployment. Hence, we can ill-afford to increase the retirement age beyond 60 years.
However, the Indian bureaucracy has created several post-retirement sinecure for itself. And politicians in the Central and State Governments dole this out indiscriminately without consideration for merit, which is nothing but crony capitalism. These positions are being cornered by IAS officers mostly as they harbour the notion that all the top talent in the country is available within this group of civil servants only. It has taken the form of quid pro quo and is the root cause of the malfunctioning of the Government, waste of talent and poor delivery. This also leads to unfair networking and lobbying among babus.
The Government should, therefore, mull an innovative way to use and harness talent and expertise from a larger resource pool but with a well thought out strategy. The Centre is trying to bring fresh talent into the Government through lateral entry. It is, however, being done on an ad hoc basis, which is counter-productive. The Centre should constitute a higher Government management service and after 15 years on the job, all officers of the organised civil services with proven capability should be allowed to be screened by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) through a written and personality test. This will also help in junking the deadwood.
For the pensioners, it could be done by amending pension rules and the Government should retain the power to summon them and make it compulsory for them to be available at least for seven days a month, should it need them. But this should be without remuneration, except for a marginal transport allowance per sitting. This will help the Government increase its productivity as well as efficiency and pensioners will also get an opportunity to contribute to nation-building. Many retirees will challenge this provision but it may be given a try on an optional basis as it will open a window of opportunity for innovation. The Government should identify such works at different levels in each department and use the large mass of talent, which otherwise goes waste after retirement. There is ample opportunity to innovate on this and it may be possible to bring the curtains down on regular post-retirement jobs and save money on defunct posts.
(The writer is a retired civil servant)
